US soldier in Afghanistan The war logs reveal civilian killings by coalition forces, secret efforts to eliminate Taliban and al-Qaida leaders, and discuss the involvement of Iran and Pakistan in supporting insurgents. Photograph: Max Whittaker/Corbis

A huge cache of secret US military files today provides a devastating portrait of the failing war in Afghanistan, revealing how coalition forces have killed hundreds of civilians in unreported incidents, Taliban attacks have soared and Nato commanders fear neighbouring Pakistan and Iran are fuelling the insurgency.

The disclosures come from more than 90,000 records of incidents and intelligence reports about the conflict obtained by the whistleblowers' website Wikileaks in one of the biggest leaks in US military history. The files, which were made available to the Guardian, the New York Times and the German weekly Der Spiegel, give a blow-by-blow account of the fighting over the last six years, which has so far cost the lives of more than 320 British and more than 1,000 US troops.

Their publication comes amid mounting concern that Barack Obama's "surge" strategy is failing and as coalition troops hunt for two US naval personnel captured by the Taliban south of Kabul on Friday.

The war logs also detail:

• How a secret "black" unit of special forces hunts down Taliban leaders for "kill or capture" without trial.

• How the US covered up evidence that the Taliban have acquired deadly surface-to-air missiles.

• How the coalition is increasingly using deadly Reaper drones to hunt and kill Taliban targets by remote control from a base in Nevada.

• How the Taliban have caused growing carnage with a massive escalation of their roadside bombing campaign, which has killed more than 2,000 civilians to date.

In a statement, the White House said the chaotic picture painted by the logs was the result of "under-resourcing" under Obama's predecessor, saying: "It is important to note that the time period reflected in the documents is January 2004 to December 2009."

The White House also criticised the publication of the files by Wikileaks: "We strongly condemn the disclosure of classified information by individuals and organisations, which puts the lives of the US and partner service members at risk and threatens our national security. Wikileaks made no effort to contact the US government about these documents, which may contain information that endanger the lives of Americans, our partners, and local populations who co-operate with us."

The logs detail, in sometimes harrowing vignettes, the toll on civilians exacted by coalition forces: events termed "blue on white" in military jargon. The logs reveal 144 such incidents.

Some of these casualties come from the controversial air strikes that have led to Afghan government protests, but a large number of previously unknown incidents also appear to be the result of troops shooting unarmed drivers or motorcyclists out of a determination to protect themselves from suicide bombers.

At least 195 civilians are admitted to have been killed and 174 wounded in total, but this is likely to be an underestimate as many disputed incidents are omitted from the daily snapshots reported by troops on the ground and then collated, sometimes erratically, by military intelligence analysts.

Bloody errors at civilians' expense, as recorded in the logs, include the day French troops strafed a bus full of children in 2008, wounding eight. A US patrol similarly machine-gunned a bus, wounding or killing 15 of its passengers, and in 2007 Polish troops mortared a village, killing a wedding party including a pregnant woman, in an apparent revenge attack.

Questionable shootings of civilians by UK troops also figure. The US compilers detail an unusual cluster of four British shootings in Kabul in the space of barely a month, in October/November 2007, culminating in the death of the son of an Afghan general. Of one shooting, they wrote: "Investigation controlled by the British. We are not able to get [sic] complete story."

A second cluster of similar shootings, all involving Royal Marine commandos in Helmand province, took place in a six-month period at the end of 2008, according to the log entries. Asked by the Guardian about these allegations, the Ministry of Defence said: "We have been unable to corroborate these claims in the short time available and it would be inappropriate to speculate on specific cases without further verification of the alleged actions."

Rachel Reid, who investigates civilian casualty incidents in Afghanistan for Human Rights Watch, said: "These files bring to light what's been a consistent trend by US and Nato forces: the concealment of civilian casualties. Despite numerous tactical directives ordering transparent investigations when civilians are killed, there have been incidents I've investigated in recent months where this is still not happening.

Accountability is not just something you do when you are caught. It should be part of the way the US and Nato do business in Afghanistan every time they kill or harm civilians." The reports, many of which the Guardian is publishing in full online, present an unvarnished and often compelling account of the reality of modern war.

Most of the material, though classified "secret" at the time, is no longer militarily sensitive. A small amount of information has been withheld from publication because it might endanger local informants or give away genuine military secrets. Wikileaks, whose founder, Julian Assange, obtained the material in circumstances he will not discuss, said it would redact harmful material before posting the bulk of the data on its "uncensorable" servers.

Wikileaks published in April this year a previously suppressed classified video of US Apache helicopters killing two Reuters cameramen on the streets of Baghdad, which gained international attention. A 22-year-old intelligence analyst, Bradley Manning, was arrested in Iraq and charged with leaking the video, but not with leaking the latest material. The Pentagon's criminal investigations department continues to try to trace the leaks and recently unsuccessfully asked Assange, he says, to meet them outside the US to help them. Assange allowed the Guardian to examine the logs at our request. No fee was involved and Wikileaks was not involved in the preparation of the Guardian's articles.

This is really only going to be news to the retards who were pro war. So, if they can drag their dicks from their mouths long enough to read it - they might learn something.

bah i guess I forget to hit submit on the nice long post I had in reply to Nick's typical vitriolic statement.

First off, I am surprised how the Guardian and the NY Times have handled this story differently. The Guardian made civilian casualties their centerpiece, while the NY Times has reported more on US forces' suspiscion that ISI (Pakistani intelligence) is in fact aiding the Afghan Taliban in insurgency efforts. I thought the latter story was more interesting, not to downplay civilian casualties.

But I think Nick you need to back up and remember that the war in Afghanistan is not the mockery that was the Iraq War pt. deux. It was a multilateral decision backed up by actual evidence. The repressive Taliban-led Afghan government in effect harbored terrorists; people who killed thousands of innocents themselves in the name of an insane version of Islam. Deposing that repressive government was a necessity to US national security as well as other "foes of Islam" like your home country.

I hate to invoke 9/11, but it's true. That cannot happen again.

Admittedly the war has had several missteps, and I am happy to see these documents made available for the public so we can see and analyze the tragedies of war. The continued road will be murky and has many obstacles (like a president whose brother is a drug deadling warlord).

I think no one is "pro-war" per se. Okay maybe red neck racist wackos, defense contractors and some armed forces officials looking to test their weapons are pro war, but that's not many people. That doesn't change the fact that this war must continued to be waged. To leave now would cause Afghanistan to devolve back into a terrorist-harboring state. Again, we cannot let that happen.

The stakes are just the U.S. in this case. I feel we could leave, shut down our borders and make any international travel an even greater hell than it already is. But Al Qaida will go after any target they can get. They're not just going to claim victory and go home to their wives and retire.

The second debate we should be having is about Wikileaks itself. Should we be pumped or scared that a website can have this much power? Should this information have already been available? Fox News pundits were calling for the capture of this Wikileaks guy Julian Assange.

Great post Gzette - if only the other posters hadn't been so up their fucking holes they may have disproved why this place is such a morgue.

bah i guess I forget to hit submit on the nice long post I had in reply to Nick's typical vitriolic statement.[/quote]

From my perspective, it's been a long old thankless slog of pointing out why the needless murder of civilians is not morally ok, confronted by grade a pro wars morons - and then, worse still, supposed anti war americans who've been caught up in relativistic jargon and piss poor unintellectual rationalisations for their own country's murderous actions.

Hence why patience runs low.

First off, I am surprised how the Guardian and the NY Times have handled this story differently. The Guardian made civilian casualties their centerpiece, while the NY Times has reported more on US forces' suspiscion that ISI (Pakistani intelligence) is in fact aiding the Afghan Taliban in insurgency efforts. I thought the latter story was more interesting, not to downplay civilian casualties.

Yeah, not really surprising, given how the US runs to patriotism first and foremost - charred corpses of innocent people are hard to stomach for americans who've tacitly supported murder - hence why it's easier to start blaming someone else.

Thank god not all of the British press are as cowardly as the American press.

But I think Nick you need to back up and remember that the war in Afghanistan is not the mockery that was the Iraq War pt. deux.[/quote]

Of course - I never said they were. They are entirely different conflicts. Well, insofar as American hegemony is divided upon certain interest based lines.

It was a multilateral decision backed up by actual evidence. The repressive Taliban-led Afghan government in effect harbored terrorists; people who killed thousands of innocents themselves in the name of an insane version of Islam.

Absolutely - I'm not in the least bit interested in defending fundamentalist zealots. These fuckheads ruin everyone's lives around them, forcing a kind of fascistic, mysoginistic, retarded value system onto the people unfortunate enough to be living in their vicinity. Fuck those arseholes - they literally do need bullets in their heads.

Deposing that repressive government was a necessity to US national security as well as other "foes of Islam" like your home country.

Well... no - since the 9/11 bombers were Saudi nationals, this is a nonsense statement. Still, I can entirely understand the "foes of islam" thing - as an idealistic strategy to undermine fundamentalism, the Afghan war was to some extent a "just war." Doesn't excuse the actual implementation of strategy that's murdered thousands upon thousands of innocent people, nor does it acknowledge the impossibility of victory in such a notion either - which is particularly important if you're going to try something as audacious as an asian land war.

I hate to invoke 9/11, but it's true. That cannot happen again.

It already did - tens of times over, except it was in Afghanistan. But they don't count, right? Only New Yorkers count.

Admittedly the war has had several missteps, and I am happy to see these documents made available for the public so we can see and analyze the tragedies of war. [/quote]

This statement is only valid if you also state that "the 9/11 attack also had some missteps, insofar as innocent people were killed."

The notion that American caused casualties are "unfortunate" whilst fundamentalist muslim extremist casualties are "deliberate" is a nonsense. Everyone outside the US knows this - but apparently there is a mental, immoral black within the US border in this regard.

The continued road will be murky and has many obstacles (like a president whose brother is a drug deadling warlord).

And which country is supporting this president?

I think no one is "pro-war" per se. Okay maybe red neck racist wackos, defense contractors and some armed forces officials looking to test their weapons are pro war, but that's not many people.

Well, of course - and that's great. Except 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 years ago - it was a helluva different story. Even the supposed anti war American crowd were guilty of tacit war support. Go look up old VV statements by the usual bunch of sickening half way rationalisers - you wont be short of evidence.

That doesn't change the fact that this war must continued to be waged. [/quote]

On the contrary, it changes it a great fucking deal. But, in fairness, I do see your point.

To leave now would cause Afghanistan to devolve back into a terrorist-harboring state. Again, we cannot let that happen.

It's going to happen regardless of what America does. Wanna bet on it? The phrase "unwinnable war" wasn't made up just for kicks.

The stakes are just the U.S. in this case. I feel we could leave, shut down our borders and make any international travel an even greater hell than it already is. But Al Qaida will go after any target they can get. They're not just going to claim victory and go home to their wives and retire.

The Afghan and Iraq wars will obviously only ignite fundamentalist islam more than douse it. The alternative? Well.. that's the real question, isn't it? It's a pity Americans are seemingly too retarded to consider it.

Stopping support for Israel would probably go a long way - but that's never going to happen, is it? So, fuck it, keep bombing the brownies, I hear there's a good Leonardo Di Caprio film out that will deflect attention from cold blooded stars and stripes murder.

The second debate we should be having is about Wikileaks itself. Should we be pumped or scared that a website can have this much power?

We should be pumped - unless you are a fascist who doesn't value freedom of speech and the investigative power of journalists who uncover imperialist war crimes.

Should this information have already been available?

Any country responsible for genocide, and its citizens, are rightly quaking in their boots.

Fucking GOOD.

Fox News pundits were calling for the capture of this Wikileaks guy Julian Assange.

Who gives a flying fuck what Fox news think about anything? Is America that retarded that Fox News is actually relevant? That would be more an indictment on civilian apathy, to allow a retard agency like Fox, to be in the least bit relevant.

All in all - thank fuck for wikileaks. And I appreciate your post Gzette, really.

This statement is only valid if you also state that "the 9/11 attack also had some missteps, insofar as innocent people were killed."

This is the only thing you said that really bothered me, not that I was offended. I've read enough of your hyberolic quips to get that that is just what you do

Buuuuut

You can't be serious if you don't see a difference between targetting innocents and collateral civilian deaths. Al Qaida targetted the innocents on purpose. I hate that just as much as I hate this:

Bloody errors at civilians' expense, as recorded in the logs, include the day French troops strafed a bus full of children in 2008, wounding eight. A US patrol similarly machine-gunned a bus, wounding or killing 15 of its passengers, and in 2007 Polish troops mortared a village, killing a wedding party including a pregnant woman, in an apparent revenge attack.

Questionable shootings of civilians by UK troops also figure. The US compilers detail an unusual cluster of four British shootings in Kabul in the space of barely a month, in October/November 2007, culminating in the death of the son of an Afghan general. Of one shooting, they wrote: "Investigation controlled by the British. We are not able to get [sic] complete story."

But this isn't a game of numbers. It's not like we're keeping score, hoping to best the near 3,000 folks we lost in 2001. I hope those incidents described in The Guardian article are the absolute exception, and I would lobby for those who perpetrated those killings be prosecuted to the full extent capable. Considering that's all they could find in 80k documents, I'm hopeful.

The ultimate goal is, sadly, nation building. I'll admit it is a long shot. I don't remember who said it, but the crux of their argument was that the Afghan people have been fighting repression for something like 30 years striaght. A few more drone bombings isn't going to stop them.

Hopefully we can change the argument. To turn from force to collaboration. I think when the U.S. undertakes something as lofty as this, it is with the best intentions. We don't want the Afghan people to suffer. We want them to prosper. And it's in that spirit that I stated that no one is "pro war." No one is in favor of killing of any kind, and no one feels anything but sadness when they read about French forces strafing a bus full of kids (except maybe some astonishment that the French military knows what strafing is).

As with Iran, Afghanistan was once a semi-progressive nation that prosperred. It eventually got hijacked by the Taliban after we fucked the country over the first time. I vote we stay this time and finish the fucking job.

One final thought: If it comes down to it, I'd rather this country get butt fucked for eternity if the alternative means constant attacks on my country and chaos on the homefront. Is that fair empirically? No. But I intrinsically feel the need for my country's safety more than pity for those who would harbor our enemies. As you stated, the US was attacked largely by Saudi Nationals, but you also know those folks were trained and indoctrinated in Afghanistan, where the state gave a fucking international terrorist organization free will to plan and execute such atrocities. I think that belief is held by most sane people in the world. Call it Patriotism or protectivism, it's just human nature I guess. And I'm not sorry.

This statement is only valid if you also state that "the 9/11 attack also had some missteps, insofar as innocent people were killed."

This is the only thing you said that really bothered me, not that I was offended. I've read enough of your hyberolic quips to get that that is just what you do

It still stands. But let's continue.

Buuuuut

You can't be serious if you don't see a difference between targetting innocents and collateral civilian deaths. Al Qaida targetted the innocents on purpose.

It's been 9 years - I don't really think you can start excusing an occupation that's been killing civilians for nearly a decade as flippantly as you do.

I hate that just as much as I hate this:

In many ways - we are pretty much on the same page, so don't think I'm just being a cunt for the sake of it. At least you had the decency and intelligence to engage in a rational discussion, which I value, a lot.

Bloody errors at civilians' expense, as recorded in the logs, include the day French troops strafed a bus full of children in 2008, wounding eight. A US patrol similarly machine-gunned a bus, wounding or killing 15 of its passengers, and in 2007 Polish troops mortared a village, killing a wedding party including a pregnant woman, in an apparent revenge attack.

Questionable shootings of civilians by UK troops also figure. The US compilers detail an unusual cluster of four British shootings in Kabul in the space of barely a month, in October/November 2007, culminating in the death of the son of an Afghan general. Of one shooting, they wrote: "Investigation controlled by the British. We are not able to get [sic] complete story."

Yep - these are all disgusting acts of bullshit.

But this isn't a game of numbers. It's not like we're keeping score, hoping to best the near 3,000 folks we lost in 2001.

Some Americans are doing exactly this. Not you, seemingly - but others on this board certainly are. And lets be honest, if it were a numbers game, America (and, lest we forget - a lot of the people who died in 9/11 weren't American) - would be coming off winning "1 death to a hundred" victors at this stage in the game.

Or, if we count Iraq, "1 death to 3 thousand."

Minimum. Do we need to bring up the Fallujah massacre, that America will have to deal with for what? The next century or so? Or, more likely, until the US dies as a nation.

So that's ultimately a terrible, shameful argument. That historians and the wider world - will be disgusted with and condemn, in coming years. Believe it. Presumably the US is willing to accept the humiliation and condemnation that they chose to ethnically cleanse Arabs - in the future (hiding behind a massive arsenal), kind of like how they are perceived now in regards to Vietnam - except ten times over (and a billion times over in terms of commercial benefits - which is even more shocking.) That's a risky business, not to mention shamefully and utterly morally fucking bankrupt.

I hope those incidents described in The Guardian article are the absolute exception, and I would lobby for those who perpetrated those killings be prosecuted to the full extent capable. Considering that's all they could find in 80k documents, I'm hopeful.

It's absolutely safe to say it's far from the exception. But then, that depends on what your definition of the "exception" is. It doesn't take too many google searches to point out the widespread killing of innocents in Afghanistan and Iraq easily, many many hundreds of times over, outnumber those who were killed on 9/11.

The ultimate goal is, sadly, nation building.

Yeah, so they keep saying.

I'll admit it is a long shot. I don't remember who said it, but the crux of their argument was that the Afghan people have been fighting repression for something like 30 years striaght. A few more drone bombings isn't going to stop them.

No doubt about it. Afghanistan has been ruled by a malicious, disgusting, fascist group of utter cunts for a long long time. But, as we all know by now - if nation building is the goal, why is there such a deep hypocrisy about which countries are chosen for such a "worthy" battle?

Why isn't Sudan being occupied? Or Darfur. Or Zimbabwe. Or North Korea? Orwellian or what?!

This notion of nation building, from popular US perspectives, only appears to apply when it's directly applicable to countries that were directly/indirectly involved in 9/11. Which probably isn't much compensation to the hundreds of thousands of people who've been killed by being burnt, shot or blown up to death.

Hopefully we can change the argument. To turn from force to collaboration.

I am in absolute agreement. If the world were filled by people like us, we'd probably have it sorted in a week or two. Sadly, we're amazing and most people aren't.

I think when the U.S. undertakes something as lofty as this, it is with the best intentions.

That's a terribly naive and factually incorrect assumption. Sadly, this is probably where we differ most. You still appear to have the "the USA are the good guys" attitude. When even a cursory reading of 20th century conflict would point you in a more realistic direction.

We don't want the Afghan people to suffer. We want them to prosper. And it's in that spirit that I stated that no one is "pro war." No one is in favor of killing of any kind, and no one feels anything but sadness when they read about French forces strafing a bus full of kids (except maybe some astonishment that the French military knows what strafing is).

Deflecting it onto the French when it's an American war is weaksauce. But, whilst I'm sure people like you are genuine, there are plenty of cunts that quite frankly are in favour of killing - I mean, how many times have we heard "we should turn the place to glass" on these boards alone? Still, isn't it fun to see that none of the fuckheads who said that kind of thing have shown their face here? Cowardly motherfuckers.

As with Iran, Afghanistan was once a semi-progressive nation that prosperred. It eventually got hijacked by the Taliban after we fucked the country over the first time. I vote we stay this time and finish the fucking job.

The Hitchens view. I can understand it, I really can. I just think it's a hell of a lot easier to take the Hitchen's view when your not the one being blown to pieces. The alternative is fascism. So which do you choose? Fascism or death? Hardly much of a choice - but then again, we're going back into the "nation building argument." And if the US is seriously going to try and use that argument, where are they in regards to Sudan/NK etc? Pick and choose, pick and choose. Same old bullshit.

One final thought: If it comes down to it, I'd rather this country get butt fucked for eternity if the alternative means constant attacks on my country and chaos on the homefront. Is that fair empirically? No. But I intrinsically feel the need for my country's safety more than pity for those who would harbor our enemies. As you stated, the US was attacked largely by Saudi Nationals, but you also know those folks were trained and indoctrinated in Afghanistan, where the state gave a fucking international terrorist organization free will to plan and execute such atrocities. I think that belief is held by most sane people in the world. Call it Patriotism or protectivism, it's just human nature I guess. And I'm not sorry.

I'll call it a disgusting, pathetic viewpoint supported by those with a nationalistic either/or interpretation of human suffering that extends only to national borders rather than human experience. And you should be ashamed. By your rationale, american lives are more valuable than Aghan lives. What a dick move.

You know, I really hate to be Buzz Killington and all about this - but, I mean... come on here. This really isn't rocket science. Why be swayed by the arguments of men who couldn't give a fuck about the agendas they're putting forth, they're clearly trying to just manipulate public support to suit their own business and ideological ends. Anyone who falls for it is a retard.

I wish I lived in your crazy fantasy world where yelling bigoted insults at people over the internet made me feel like I was making some kind of an impact upon the world. Because that's the only reason that I can see for you coming onto these forums and textually screaming your fucking lungs out at people who neither started the war nor have any control over it.

Do you think that one day everyone that you preach your pseudo-intellectual bullshit to is going to go "you know what, Nick is right. Let's just go stop the war now. Ok guys, call it off, Nick was right apparently. We all good here? No more war? Cool. Good deal you guys. Turn out Nick was onto something."

If you give so much of a shit take your lily white Irish ass over to fucking Afghanistan and actually do something. Otherwise your armchair bullshit is just as irrelevant as the dogmatic and moronic warhawks that you despise so much.

Oh, and of all of the nationalities to call Americans stupid? You're fucking Irish dude. Seriously. Do you even know what the god damn Irish have contributed to the modern world? Because fuck if I do. Bono? Whiskey? Potatoes? Fuck off.

Going out to play pool now with my fellow klan members. Have a nice night. - Midnyte

We've lost our way in the Afghan War that much is obvious. We started it for good reasons but that was a long time ago.
Everyone deplores needless civilian casualties* and there have clearly been many that our govenments have been covering up.
The Pakistan angle is very worrying. Destabilising a strongly muslim nuclear power was probably not on the "desired outcomes" list when this war started.

I'm all for discussing this as I find it interesting but starting the thread with yet another retarded trolling ourburst gets us nowhere. Cartalas was banned for less shit than Nick is pulling these days.

* except the Taliban obviously. As revealed in the docs the Taliban solved an "internal dispute" by bombing and killing 100 mourners at a funeral to take out ONE of their guys who'd broken ranks. We may suck at this war but we're not pulling this kind of crap deliberately.

vn_Tanc wrote:
I'm all for discussing this as I find it interesting but starting the thread with yet another retarded trolling ourburst gets us nowhere. Cartalas was banned for less shit than Nick is pulling these days.

They day Cartalas was banned was the biggest nail in VV's coffin. It's not nailed all the way shut but after that point even a zombie couldn't get out. The inner Cliqué decided they wanted a liberal friend lovefest instead of a healthy, well rounded, flame board for thicker skins.

vn_Tanc wrote:
I'm all for discussing this as I find it interesting but starting the thread with yet another retarded trolling ourburst gets us nowhere. Cartalas was banned for less shit than Nick is pulling these days.

They day Cartalas was banned was the biggest nail in VV's coffin. It's not nailed all the way shut but after that point even a zombie couldn't get out. The inner Cliqué decided they wanted a liberal friend lovefest instead of a healthy, well rounded, flame board for thicker skins.

Wasn't deflecting, it just seemed like the most eggregious example used by the Guardian. That or the wedding party getting blown to shit ... which was done suprisingly by Brits.

I still maintain that protecting the security of our country is more important than anothers. We don't pick and choose nations to build. The logical leap from 9/11 to invading Afghanistan was not like Evel Knieval jumping the Grand Canyon or chicken shit bingo. And your argument is fucked anyway, because if we had gone into Sudan you would likely be calling my country a bunch of war-loving faggots for that too. How you state it, it's a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario.

vn_Tanc wrote:
I'm all for discussing this as I find it interesting but starting the thread with yet another retarded trolling ourburst gets us nowhere. Cartalas was banned for less shit than Nick is pulling these days.

They day Cartalas was banned was the biggest nail in VV's coffin. It's not nailed all the way shut but after that point even a zombie couldn't get out. The inner Cliqué decided they wanted a liberal friend lovefest instead of a healthy, well rounded, flame board for thicker skins.

I'm just annoyed we can't ban drooling retards like that from real life, but then, I guess we'd have to make our own fucking McDonalds.

May 2003 - "Mission Accomplished"
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.

Oh, and of all of the nationalities to call Americans stupid? You're fucking Irish dude. Seriously. Do you even know what the god damn Irish have contributed to the modern world? Because fuck if I do. Bono? Whiskey? Potatoes? Fuck off.

LULZ!

If Nickyboy had any understanding of the real world I think he'd lighten up a bit. However I think he drank the coolaid his liberal teachers (and Micheal Moore) fed him, and to him, everything is evil.

As far as the "wars" go (they are no longer wars, they are policing against criminals using really big guns) just by looking at a map one can quickly discern why exactly we are there. No weapons of mass destruction? well duh, you cant just outright TELL Iran "we're surrounding your dumbasses so you dont do something stupid". So you make up "other" reasons. There are things going on in the world that you and I are not privy too. Perhaps the invasions of Iraq and Afganistan were done to stave off a possible world war... If that was the case, would you be less fervently against the actions?

Wouldnt the world have been a better place had there been a super power to occupy Poland and Belelux in the 30s before the germans could?

Now yes people are going to die. shit's gonna get blown up. However far fewer have died during our occupation than the 8 years of the Iran/Iraq war. We are not there to kill off the Kurds, or exterminate the shiites. Could the same be said had Iran invaded?

It's funny how the largest leak in American military history is greeted in absolute defense by a random nonentity and a pretentious, holier than thou Englishman.

Colour me surprised.

BAN "someone"

Durrr...

Really? A "nonentity?" And your opinion is somehow more relevant because you take literally every opportunity to open your figurative mouth and spew out whatever unfortunate bullshit you happen to be preaching about on any given day?

Going out to play pool now with my fellow klan members. Have a nice night. - Midnyte

Bubba Grizz wrote:Question: Will there be a seperate thread for war lovers who aren't "faggots"?

Metanis has been starting those all week.

Wait until the American people realize their President doesn't have the balls to win in Afghanistan...
...and doesn't have the guts to withdraw.

And it's one, two, three,
What are we fighting for ?
Don't ask me, I don't give a damn,
Next stop is Vietnam;
And it's five, six, seven,
Open up the pearly gates,
Well there ain't no time to wonder why,
Whoopee! we're all gonna die.

Yeah this place is pretty much a wasteland now, isn't it? Interesting to read once every other month or three, though. I'm still rolling over Teenybloke the basement dwelling retard obtaining some higher form of enlightenment after his mother booted his ass out and made him become a productive human being in society. Good for you, buddy!

It's too bad Cartalas was banned; Aranuil, Midnight and the others split. Threads used to be relatively interesting then. Now that some narcissistic fraud has taken the helm of trolling for the greater good it just isn't the same.

Badabidi wrote:Yeah this place is pretty much a wasteland now, isn't it? Interesting to read once every other month or three, though. I'm still rolling over Teenybloke the basement dwelling retard obtaining some higher form of enlightenment after his mother booted his ass out and made him become a productive human being in society. Good for you, buddy!

It's too bad Cartalas was banned; Aranuil, Midnight and the others split. Threads used to be relatively interesting then. Now that some narcissistic fraud has taken the helm of trolling for the greater good it just isn't the same.

There was never a golden age here. Discussing politics with most Americans is like sandpapering your dick. You all treat it WAY too much like supporting a sports team.

Cartalas was simply a low-grade moron.
Midnight was just a wanker.
Aranuil was an arrogant poseur.
Almost everyone else here could be replaced by a chimp wearing a sandwich board stating their one opinion that never changes.

The two most interesting journies I've seen here are Spang (from the dark side to the light) and Nick (from reasonable poster to frothing parody of himself).

War is an option whose time has passed. Peace is the only option for the future. At present we occupy a treacherous no-man's-land between peace and war, a time of growing fear that our military might has expanded beyond our capacity to control it and our political differences widened beyond our ability to bridge them. . . .

Short of changing human nature, therefore, the only way to achieve a practical, livable peace in a world of competing nations is to take the profit out of war.
--RICHARD M. NIXON, "REAL PEACE" (1983)

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, represents, in the final analysis, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children."

Badabidi wrote:Yeah this place is pretty much a wasteland now, isn't it? Interesting to read once every other month or three, though. I'm still rolling over Teenybloke the basement dwelling retard obtaining some higher form of enlightenment after his mother booted his ass out and made him become a productive human being in society. Good for you, buddy!

It's too bad Cartalas was banned; Aranuil, Midnight and the others split. Threads used to be relatively interesting then. Now that some narcissistic fraud has taken the helm of trolling for the greater good it just isn't the same.

There was never a golden age here. Discussing politics with most Americans is like sandpapering your dick. You all treat it WAY too much like supporting a sports team.

Cartalas was simply a low-grade moron.
Midnight was just a wanker.
Aranuil was an arrogant poseur.
Almost everyone else here could be replaced by a chimp wearing a sandwich board stating their one opinion that never changes.

The two most interesting journies I've seen here are Spang (from the dark side to the light) and Nick (from reasonable poster to frothing parody of himself).

I'm about to plan a little trip with my family and extended family, And I would like to ask you to assist me. I'm going to walk across the border from the U.S. into Mexico, and I need to make a few arrangements. I know you can help with this. I plan to skip all the legal stuff like visas, passports, immigration quotas and laws. I'm sure they handle those things the same way you do here. So, would you mind telling your buddy, President Vicente Fox, that I'm on my way over? Please let him know that I will be expecting the following:
1. Free medical care for my entire family .
2. English-speaking government bureaucrats for all services I might need, whether I use them or not.
3. All government forms need to be printed in English.
4. I want my kids to be taught by English-speaking teachers.
5. Schools need to include classes on American culture and history.
6. I want my kids to see the American flag flying on the top of the flag pole at their school with the Mexican flag flying lower down.
7. Please plan to feed my kids at school for both breakfast and lunch.
8. I will need a local Mexican driver's license so I can get easy access to government services.
9. I do not plan to have any car insurance, and I won't make any effort to learn local traffic laws.
10. In case one of the Mexican police officers does not get the memo from Pres. Fox to leave me alone, please be sure that all police officers speak English.
11. I plan to fly the U.S. flag from my house top, put flag decals on my car, and have a gigantic celebration on July 4th. I do not want any complaints or negative comments from the locals.
12. I would also like to have a nice job without paying any taxes, and don't enforce any labor laws or tax laws.
13. Please tell all the people in the country to be extremely nice and never say a critical word about me, or about the strain I might place on the economy. I know this is an easy request b ecause you already do all these things for all t he people who come to the U.S. from Mexico. I am sure that Pres. Fox won't mind returning the favor if you ask him nicely. However, if he gives you any trouble, just invite him to go quail hunting with your V.P.

I started reading your gigantic wall of absolute blithering fucking stupidity, and this is how far I got.

Not only is it reactionary and polarizingly ignorant, but it is a lie. A complete and utter lie invented by some sad, pathetic little conservative shill with too much time on their hands and too much to bitch about.

In Tennessee and I'm assuming fucking everywhere it is illegal (read: against the fucking law) to teach any subject wholly in a foreign language at any grade level, including "ELL" (English Language Learner, a program for english-deficit children) classes. My mother is an ELL teacher. She is explicitly forbidden to teach any subject entirely in spanish (or any foreign language). In fact, she doesn't even speak very much spanish. In fact, the vast majority of her students aren't even fucking spanish, but that's besides the point because we are talking about TN here.

So in closing I invite you to kindly go fuck yourself the next time you choose to post what amounts to nothing more than blatant lies.

Going out to play pool now with my fellow klan members. Have a nice night. - Midnyte

I'm about to plan a little trip with my family and extended family, And I would like to ask you to assist me. I'm going to walk across the border from the U.S. into Mexico, and I need to make a few arrangements. I know you can help with this. I plan to skip all the legal stuff like visas, passports, immigration quotas and laws. I'm sure they handle those things the same way you do here. So, would you mind telling your buddy, President Vicente Fox, that I'm on my way over? Please let him know that I will be expecting the following:
1. Free medical care for my entire family .
2. English-speaking government bureaucrats for all services I might need, whether I use them or not.
3. All government forms need to be printed in English.
4. I want my kids to be taught by English-speaking teachers.
5. Schools need to include classes on American culture and history.
6. I want my kids to see the American flag flying on the top of the flag pole at their school with the Mexican flag flying lower down.
7. Please plan to feed my kids at school for both breakfast and lunch.
8. I will need a local Mexican driver's license so I can get easy access to government services.
9. I do not plan to have any car insurance, and I won't make any effort to learn local traffic laws.
10. In case one of the Mexican police officers does not get the memo from Pres. Fox to leave me alone, please be sure that all police officers speak English.
11. I plan to fly the U.S. flag from my house top, put flag decals on my car, and have a gigantic celebration on July 4th. I do not want any complaints or negative comments from the locals.
12. I would also like to have a nice job without paying any taxes, and don't enforce any labor laws or tax laws.
13. Please tell all the people in the country to be extremely nice and never say a critical word about me, or about the strain I might place on the economy. I know this is an easy request b ecause you already do all these things for all t he people who come to the U.S. from Mexico. I am sure that Pres. Fox won't mind returning the favor if you ask him nicely. However, if he gives you any trouble, just invite him to go quail hunting with your V.P.

Sincerely,
a fellow American

Very nice post. I see from the comments that this bit of reality theater went right over their heads. Bagar and Gzette for sure didn't get it!

Canelek wrote:It is a chain letter, and possibly a phishing scam...at the very least it was written and distributed for the sole purpose of collecting email addresses.

Now why do you suppose it might be effective at that purpose?

Depends on how you look at it, but in email form, as that particular blurb was at one time, the originator ultimately ends up with a fat stack of email addresses to use for their original intent. The intent is generally the outside sales angle of selling a product or for a nefarious purpose, such as collecting personal and confidential data for identity theft or fraud.

Granted, most of these things fall flat, but playing the numbers, someone will always bite. I think I have gone off on a bit of a tangent...

I'm about to plan a little trip with my family and extended family, And I would like to ask you to assist me. I'm going to walk across the border from the U.S. into Mexico, and I need to make a few arrangements. I know you can help with this. I plan to skip all the legal stuff like visas, passports, immigration quotas and laws. I'm sure they handle those things the same way you do here. So, would you mind telling your buddy, President Vicente Fox, that I'm on my way over? Please let him know that I will be expecting the following:
1. Free medical care for my entire family .
2. English-speaking government bureaucrats for all services I might need, whether I use them or not.
3. All government forms need to be printed in English.
4. I want my kids to be taught by English-speaking teachers.
5. Schools need to include classes on American culture and history.
6. I want my kids to see the American flag flying on the top of the flag pole at their school with the Mexican flag flying lower down.
7. Please plan to feed my kids at school for both breakfast and lunch.
8. I will need a local Mexican driver's license so I can get easy access to government services.
9. I do not plan to have any car insurance, and I won't make any effort to learn local traffic laws.
10. In case one of the Mexican police officers does not get the memo from Pres. Fox to leave me alone, please be sure that all police officers speak English.
11. I plan to fly the U.S. flag from my house top, put flag decals on my car, and have a gigantic celebration on July 4th. I do not want any complaints or negative comments from the locals.
12. I would also like to have a nice job without paying any taxes, and don't enforce any labor laws or tax laws.
13. Please tell all the people in the country to be extremely nice and never say a critical word about me, or about the strain I might place on the economy. I know this is an easy request b ecause you already do all these things for all t he people who come to the U.S. from Mexico. I am sure that Pres. Fox won't mind returning the favor if you ask him nicely. However, if he gives you any trouble, just invite him to go quail hunting with your V.P.

Sincerely,
a fellow American

Very nice post. I see from the comments that this bit of reality theater went right over their heads. Bagar and Gzette for sure didn't get it!

I think what he means is why this particular topic would be something that would be passed on and on to others so that email address could be collected.

Basically that was the feeling at the time which I am guessing was during the Bush era. I don't know the state of illegal immegration at that time or at this time for that matter. All we deal with in GB are those damn Canadians.